Imagine a World Where Being "Gay" is the Norm and Being "Straight" is the Minority

Discussion in 'THREAD ARCHIVES' started by Ray, Dec 22, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

    You've finished watching this right? Tell me, above all else, how does this short film make you feel as a whole? Have your perspectives on sexuality changed? Do you find this video a good way to send a message across to the people who hate those who are not "straight" because it's "wrong" to them? Tell me your thoughts.
  2. Mostly that I am rather glad I live in a liberal country and that I'd totally watch Romeo and Julio. Oh and breeder is a hilarious insult.

    But if I have to be honest, the main lingering feeling I have is #fuckamerica and #fuckbiblethumpers. Oh and that ending pissed me off. If I'd grown up in a world like this I'd probably be a lot more violent and emotionally withdrawn.

    My stance on other people their sexuality is that I don't give a fuck. Unless I harbour romantic/sexual feelings for them, in which case I obviously would. This perspective has not changed.

    As for it's effectiveness, it'd be nice if one video could turn it around, but it won't. I'm sure this can be used as a tool for younger viewers, but the older people get the less effective shock-therapy becomes. However to achieve actual change you need to change the environment, especially create spaces where people are accepted for who they are. I'm sure there's a lot to be done still, but I'd also like keep victories in mind. I mean, a couple months ago I met up with an old friend. He'd come out years back, and I hadn't seen him since... Well before that. Funny thing is, at some point I was having a conversation with a gay man about how annoying gay men were if they acted really gay. It was hilarious. The beautiful thing here was that it was just us bitching about people being douchebags, berating their behaviour rather than judging them for their sexuality. That was irrelevant and I think that's actually sort of glorious.

    Honestly I think the main thing we need to change is stop seeing people's sexuality as a reason to think of them as different. I think that's counter-productive. We're all just people, your sexuality doesn't play any bigger impact on how decent a person you are as the colour of your eyes, and realising that is our end-goal.
    • Love Love x 2
  3. I've never really had a problem with homosexuality, so this video didn't really change my view.

    I was basically just nodding along. Some people I know in real life, such as some of my friends, teachers, and teammates definitely need a wake up call though
  4. There'd probably be a shortage of human beings.
    And there'd likely be ALOT of adoptions.

    I honestly don't see the problem with people being homosexual.
    You're a boy that likes boys? That's great, Just don't try to come on to me.
    You're a girl that likes girls? Wonderful, enjoy being a girl that likes girls.

    THOUGH, I do see where people are coming from. I'd truly wish for my future child(ren) to be with the opposite gender, though, I wouldn't be an ass of a father about it and force my beliefs on them.

    Edit: I mean, we could always just follow Japan's, India's, etc. examples and generally just not give a crap about sexuality.... Generally.
    • You Get a Cookie You Get a Cookie x 1
  5. Damn it, why'd I watch that video again. Wrists mess me up.

    Anyways, I don't see this video having much effect. It might garner some sympathy from the homosexuality-opposed, but there's no reason for them to change their perspective. Just because someone suffers because of a part of who they are, doesn't automatically make it okay to be that way.

    Personally, homosexuality doesn't bother me at all. However, there are logical reasons why certain rights attributed to a heterosexual couple would not be attributed to a homosexual couple. A parent wanting their child to be heterosexual is natural—it allows them to look forward to a direct genetic lineage. This is important to a lot of people, in large part due to the very way life functions. Simple evolutionary tendency. Homosexuals pose a threat to this lineage, because if your offspring think it's okay, then there's a slightly higher chance that they'll do it too.

    Whether or not the propagation of your genes matters to you is a personal decision. A person has a right to dislike homosexuals.

    The line to not be crossed, however, is once that dislike imposes itself on society. Once an individual attacks a homosexual individual for their orientation, it is no longer merely their problem, it is the problem of society. And society is changing, and its saying that is wrong.

    The one question that still remains is who deserves greater power over a child, their parent, or society? Does a parent have the right to the child they brought into this world, or is it merely a privilege?

    I believe it is a privilege, and that is why I believe it is necessary for parents to accept homosexuality as a possibility for their child, because that is what my society accepts. It is up to society as a whole then to make its choice, because it is ultimately the aggregate that determines an individual's freedoms, not the individual itself.
  6. Point X is false, therefore disregard point Y and Z? That's hardly intelligent. It's like saying Terminator is a bad movie because machines would never rise against us. Einstein was stupid because a number of his claims have been proven false. Etcetera. It's purpose is not a realistic representation. It's purpose is to share an experience. I'm not going to deny the video primarily plays on emotion, but come on.
    • Thank Thank x 1
  7. What? There's nothing that is false in the film. I just pointed out that the film didn't change how I feel "as a whole" towards homosexuality because of the breeding season thing. The hatred towards homosexuals stems, in my opinion, in the fact that they defy simple laws of nature, instinct. If the purpose of the film is to spread awareness of abuse and rejection of homosexuality, which is based on the fact that they cannot produce offspring together, it defeats itself by having this "breeding season" be a central part of it. It's my opinion, which the topic starter asked for, and I don't know how to make it more clear.
  8. This failed to deliver on shock value for me because the target demographic that it's aiming to convince already deludes themselves into an "us versus them" mentality, to the level that comparisons don't work anymore. It's a nice sentiment, but if you really want to hit someone who sincerely believes homosexuals are evil because "mah babble", you'll probably need to break down their walls of zealotry in other ways first. At the very least, hit them with something while they're unprepared, not when they have 16 minutes to put up as many walls as they can.
  9. Discounting a source that leads to several other sources of evolutionary biology via providing an argument that has zero evidence to support it. This is telling of the strength of your position. :deadhorse:

    "People" as you put it are nothing more than another animal evolved from the same pond every other animal came from. The idea that humans are somehow "unique" in their sexual dimorphism and sexuality is simply... Wrong. From a scientific perspective, it is absolutely, utterly wrong. To punish people and socially ostracize them for that behaviour is wrong. Using "God hates fags" as an argument is straight wrong because God also gives rules for how to beat your slaves, and tells you to murder people for working on Sundays. We don't do those things because we've evolved socially to a sufficient level as to realize that God was wrong.

    There is absolutely zero reason why we should cease homosexuals from performing their... "Behaviour", as you so put it. Remember: Adoption is an option! Homosexual couples who cannot have children absolutely can alleviate the horrible choked up social services system with good homes. Ignoring that, if you must insist on biological reproduction, a homosexual isn't incapable of it: They can get artificially inseminated from a sperm bank, or donate to said sperm bank. If you then still have to insist on "dick A must go into vagina B", they're still totally capable of doing that. They won't derive much enjoyment from it, but being homosexual does not preclude them from having biological children.

    The argument is shit, the opinion is shit, it's backwards shit perpetuated by a bronze age book that tells people to murder each other over what kind of clothing they wear. This is one of those issues that is pretty plainly black and white and the only people that cling to it are the same fucking backwoods idiots that do everything in their power to cease the progression of mankind.

    Anyway, sorry if that sounds like I'm directing it at you, I'm not. I fully realize you're pretty much playing Devil's Advocate, and I can appreciate the integrity involved in such a position that you can open your mind to view others perspectives, but remember: "Don't be so open minded that your brain falls out."
    • Thank Thank x 2
    • Love Love x 1
  10. Cause dismissing a list of information, with links and citations to the studies provided, is easier than actually defending your statement, "The hatred towards homosexuals stems, in my opinion, in the fact that they defy simple laws of nature, instinct."

    If God hates homosexuals, then we have no understanding of why God hates homosexuals, because we cannot fathom the point of view of a being that is beyond our comprehension. To state, without reservation, one reason or another, is ridiculous, and in effect, just you posturing your personal feelings onto said deity.

    If you dislike homosexuals simply because they cannot breed, why? Are we seriously at risk of extinction because our population is too small?
    • Thank Thank x 1
  11. Except homosexuality is found in every species, and their instincts will be more in tune than ours are.

    I can mention the penguins who adopted and tried to steal eggs from other couples. They were gay males.

    Lions are constantly in gay relationships. Giraffes are almost always in a gay relationship.

    Nature has a nice way of pointing out this, so homosexuality doesn't really defy it as much as it proves that it is not out of any being's nature. However, the argument about this is only held in one species of if homosexuality is against nature. I can bring up articles of nature proving us wrong on many topics, but this topic in particular.
    • Thank Thank x 1
  12. You mentioned breeding season being unrealistic, in other words; a falsehood in a realistic presentation of the role reversal. I understand perfectly.

    It's actually very natural for people to discriminate. Like the link I posted in my first post demonstrates, this can be almost any trait. Be it eye colour, sexuality, race, etc. Humans are social creatures and we form groups based on similarities. Discrimination is out-group behaviour, which boils down to protection of the ego by raising the value of the identity of the self and the identity of the group above others. It's honestly rooted in the exact same thing as frat rivalries. The reason for discrimination is a perceived difference. Everything else is simply used as an excuse to justify discrimination.

    As for being defying the laws of nature, because at this point why the hell not, google ancient Greece, Bonobos, homosexuality in animals, etc. You may feel it is unnatural, but saying it is would be... Plain false. It occurs naturally, without human interference. Look. You're basically saying everyone with a different opinion than you is not intelligent. Which I think is stupid and this post is basically why.

    Unless of course you want to bring scripture into this, but to be honest I really, really hope you won't.
    • Like Like x 2
    • Love Love x 1
    • Thank Thank x 1
  13. We can still reproduce. With today's technology, that's definitely possible. Even so, who says we need to be so many in the first place? It's not like the human race will dissolve because a couple of thousand or million people are homosexual. We're so many anyway. -w- In my opinion less people capable of having children is a good thing.

    As for it being unnatural... everything we humans do is 'unnatural' if you look at it that way. If we were completely natural and lived in sync with nature as the rest of the animals on the planet, we wouldn't be having environmental issues caused by us. We wouldn't even have computers or... I Everything we humans do is unnatural, so that's not really an argument against homosexuality. -.-
    • Thank Thank x 1
  14. I like your use of the word 'fact.' It doesn't have to be true because, as long as the message identified by the word 'fact' is not an opinion, it is a fact.

    'Simple,' 'laws,' and 'nature' I'm less impressed with, simply because it's 'instinct' that drives a homosexual to mate with another of the same gender. It's the same kind of instinct that drives the common heterosexual to mate with another being of the opposite gender, or a cardboard tube, or a hand, or a <censored>.

    As for the film, I saw it a looooong time ago. It was amusing for a bit, but being reminded of that video's existence just bothers me a bit. I don't know if it's the scripture-thumpers rambling a bit too much within earshot, or just hearing one too many christmas carols, but I've been hearing a lot of religious fear-mongering lately concerning El Presidente and Marriage Equality and Planned Parenthood (still an issue in politics, fifty years after the debate started).

    I get the feeling that if homosexuality were the norm in society, society would have probably developed ways to conceive children without resorting to heterosexuality by now, though transgenderism would probably be viewed just as strangely as it is in reality (guy likes women, stops being guy so being with women can be acceptable?). It's a fun concept to mull over. Some fantasy book I picked up described a society in which bisexuality was the norm, and homosexual couples just picked up the extra kids their heterosexual siblings couldn't take care of because da hets were pumpin' out too much babby. The book didn't spend much time exploring this concept though: mostly it worried about stuff like sorceresses and slaying basilisks. *shrug*

    Imagination's fun.
    • Thank Thank x 1
  15. No. You got downvoted into ground for a conceited comment. And for saying that gay people defy the laws of nature, something that is so inherently false and ignorant I at that point could not be bothered with a respone other then the simple click of a dislike. You have given no scientific or even philosophical source to your comment. Why would you expect any of use to take your seriusly and not criticise you? What kind of inane logic do you operate on?

    Yeah the dislikes said alot about us. We don't like people throwing blanket statements around without any basis.
    • Like Like x 3
    • Go Home, You're Drunk Go Home, You're Drunk x 1
    • You Get a Cookie You Get a Cookie x 1
  16. So if someone has an opinion different than your own or not correct as you see fit that calls for them to to be wrapped up in a Facebook drama course of like dislike? What's the purpose of asking someone's opinion if you're going to bombard them with hate? The purpose of the topic is to hear all aspects of different point of views. Life is going to be filled with them. Just because you think you have the right answer does not mean you do no matter how much so called scientific philosophical etc you put in your post. I may not agree with Prisk's opinion, I may not like it but I can agree it is their opinion.

    Oh and Hellis before you chastise someone you should learn to spell some words correctly. Just saying. You get a rating, since you want to throw them around, of being drunk because obviously you are with those spelling errors. Lay off the drinks early in the morning.
  17. Not really. You can have an opinion. If it's a blatantly "wrong" opinion, like say, "All Nazis were evil people," or in this case, "Homosexuality is biologically wrong," than people are going to point that out for you.
  18. I asked myself the same question. Why ask for opinions if you're going to shoot them down? I wouldn't worry about the ratings, it's just something online. When you get off the computer they won't affect you in any kind of way. If you continue to get them while you are online so be it doesn't make you any less of what you are.
    • Like Like x 2
  19. Aren't you doing the same thing to them? Basically saying their opinion is not intelligent either? That's the pot calling the kettle black.
    • Like Like x 1
  20. I think it's more of a semantics issue. Homosexuality is illogical to Prisk, because they feel romance and sexual attraction should lead to offspring. They are entitled to this opinion. The issue is that they stated it as fact, and no underlining an IMO is going to null that. It's about as effective as spitting someone in their face and then telling them you meant no offence.

    That said, though. I do agree with @Fenix on this. No need to kick someone when they're down. Disagree as we may, Prisk did say they have no issue with homosexuality. You all would do well to remember that. 'specially if you want to create a more tolerant environment.

    And you were doing so, so very well. Now you're just shit-stirring :/
    #20 Kestrel, Dec 23, 2014
    Last edited: Dec 23, 2014
    • Like Like x 2
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.